GOP bill seeks to condemn UN children’s rights treaty

Yep. If Christ opposed anything it was child welfare. Have Republicans no shame?

Praise Jebus, God hates children, Amen.

Jobs?

@ SeanH

The Republikans have NO interests in JOBS… They only LOVE ONE thing……………………………………………….. MONEY!!!!!! When it comes to their sanctimonious sermons about “Reagan” and “Jesus” and of the other mindless drool that drips from the Repiblikan brain pan JOBS are the LAST thing that these little cowards care about..

there is one little problem with parental rights legislation: it puts parenting into a legal context. In other words,once the law is there, someone (who?) will have to define and enforce it. Hands? who wants the state to define and enforce parenting?

Whoa. Snappy comebacks fail me…..

Wow, the errors in this opinion piece. For starters, there is no bill. These are both resolutions. And they will not be “passed into law.” They will be resolved. And this “bill” was not produced by the HomeSchool Legal Defense Association as you posit. It is based on a model resolution from ParentalRights.org (which is NOT a subsidiary of HSLDA, but an independent organization), but the final draft was written by members of the Minnesota legislature. It also is not a Republican resolution. A similar resolution passed unanimously in both houses of the Democrat-majority Louisiana legislature last year. Is there someone there who understands the workings of your legislature who could help you straighten out these misconceptions?

The passage of the bill by a Democrat-majority legislature proves that utter disregard for children is, in fact, non-partisan. I don’t see that as anything to be proud of.

Michael, I appreciate your comment and you have offered some constructive criticism. I thank you for that. However, in submitting your comment I noticed that your email is from ParentalRights.org and your comment was sent from HSLDA’s servers. Perhaps you could elaborate for the benefit of our readers on that discrepancy.

Whether you are for or against spanking is no reason to obsess about blocking something as important as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. As pointed out by the author of this story, the U.S. and Somalia are the only countries that have not ratified the treaty which was first drafted in 1989. It’s outlandish that for more than twenty years the US has not signed on. I have worked at the UN as both a consultant and as part of civil society. I have also traveled to countries where children are subjects of heinous crimes – prostitution, child trafficking, etc. and many of these crimes are committed by your fellow Americans. This Convention allows Americans abroad to be held accountable. It helps provide a safety net so that children can not be trafficked, and that international adoptions are accountable. It’s amazing that a few self-absorbed know-nothings here in MN and within those organizations that Michael is with think they know what’s happening in the world. Their actions are despicable.

p.s. “spanking” is only one of the issues they throw out – and relatively minor compared to laws against child trafficking. Their take on how it would bankrupt a state is as outlandish as their resolution, bill or basic thought process. Show me a place in the world – besides the US and Somalia – that has gone bankrupt due to this important, humane Convention.

Oh just one more – Andy! What you point out here is HILARIOUS! My whole family is getting a chuckle out of that little “finding”

I guess it is just too pro-child for the party of opposition.

I looked through a few of the ParentalRights complaints, and found them to be paranoid misrepresentations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

article 5 :
“States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention. ”

Looks like it tells the government to back off and respect the preeminent rights of parents.

article 18 :
“1. States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child. Parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern. ”

Sounds a lot like the “a mother and a father” mantra to me.

article 30 :
“In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities or persons of indigenous origin exist, a child belonging to such a minority or who is indigenous shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of his or her group, to enjoy his or her own culture, to profess and practise his or her own religion, or to use his or her own language. ”

The Christian religious cult is still intact.

The convention is a set of standards and commitments, not actual laws.

From a bit of research, I conclude that a resolution has no real authority outside the chamber that passed it. I joint resolution does, but must be signed by the Governor.

“Resolutions are formal actions of the Legislature which express intent on the part of one or both bodies, but are not codified into Minnesota statutes upon passage. Each body can pass a separate resolution to express individual intent. They can also pass resolutions jointly or concurrently. ”

Minn. Const. art. IV, sec. 24
“PRESENTATION OF ORDERS, RESOLUTIONS, AND VOTES TO GOVERNOR. Each order, resolution or vote requiring the concurrence of the two houses except such as relate to the business or adjournment of the legislature shall be presented to the governor and is subject to his veto as prescribed in case of a bill. ”

Is it that republicans don’t want the outside world to keep track of how we treat our children, or that they do not like it when outsiders prove to be better Christians?

@Andy I do not deny that PRO and HSLDA are closely connected. That is public knowledge. But sharing a network does not make us a subsidiary of HSLDA. I do not deny our connection – but the extent of that connection has been misrepresented with falsehoods in your article. I am beginning to sense that was intentional.

@Deborah – The U.S. is a party to the Optional Protocol to the CRC on child trafficking, prostitution and pornography. None of the things you list is a benefit to be gained by ratifying the CRC – We are already a part of international efforts to halt those heinous crimes (something we at ParentalRights.org are grateful for, by the way). You are selling us something we already proudly own.

What about the budget? Where are the jobs?
Why are they working on crap that they have no business messing with?

Because they lied to you, Olivia. If you were a True Believer, you wouldn’t even ask.

Good Morning,
No need to dig for my identity. I am a homeschooling father that serves voluntarily as the Tennessee Director for Parental Rights.Org.

My blog answers many of the complaints and objections voiced above, but I have a few specific points to make.
1) We are pro-family and therefore pro-child. Parents are far better parents than government agencies. Just look at government schools or the foster care system for examples of government’s parenting. We simply want to maintain the foundational freedom of parents to raise their own children without governmental interference excpet in cases of criminal misconduct which is already clearly defined. Parents should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

2) This comes to my second point. The UN CRC reverses that order and presumes that parents must prove to a government official that they are worthy by standards set by the government. The federal government will decide what a good parent is.

3) @ Carl. Silly jabs about being against child welfare are “childish”. That adds nothing to this conversation.

4) Many great leaders (both good and evil ones) recognized that control or strength of the family unit would determine the success of their rule. This issue is far more important than simple economic issues. We all know that both parties really do little to help the economy. This issue will last for generations if control of child rearing is placed in the hands of the government. The next decade will likely forget this decades economic issues when it has its own.

4) @Deborah; No paranoia here. Everyone should read my blog for themselves. Don’t listen to one side’s rant. I have read both sides extensively to decide for myself rather than be a lazy sheep following the loudest ranter.

5) @Deborah: For your information, a recent article made mincemeat of the treaty’s claims to be helping children. If all other countries signed it, why are child trafficking and child soldiers still such a problem. The treaty is worthless except to undermine the family and our nation’s sovereignty.

[...] Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most ratified international treaty to date, with 193 countries having ratified it. The only other country besides the United States that has not ratified the CRC [...]

I think children should have rights, but at the same time children don’t know what’s best for themselves, the saying mother knows best, is true if the mother isn’t on drugs or has mental issues, most children would rather be with their parents, they should not have the right to choose any other way unless there is true abuse going on and they should be allowed to make the call, because children don’t lie, but adults do and that’s the reason for parentalrights.org most of these parents have been lied on to the childwelfare system by a revengeful person who couldn’t have children, or to harrass their family, and then the child welfare system gets ahold to the kids, and just wants to make a profit off of them, rights of the child is only a cover up, they feed off of people warped in the brain thinking kids are abused or being neglected by their parents. it would be nice, if they really were truly helping children being abused, their cases always go abanoned, because they want easy cases.